Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Blender is testing PeerTube after YouTube blocks their videos worldwide

blender.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 444 posts

Re: Blender is testing PeerTube after YouTube blocks their videos worldwide

#291

Post by colordrops »

e12e wrote: post #284
Endy wrote: post #270

Am I the only one who thinks it would be better if Blender uploaded directly to archive.org or archive.is? As much as it's interesting on a technical level, the fact that PeerTube is by nature decentralized and self-hosted is going to reduce Blender's overall visibility (which is what I think Alphabet/Google wants). Whether Alphabet is still making any money off SketchUp, or whether one of the 3D companies is paying…

As much as I'm against corporate power in general, and worried about Google in particular : I very much doubt that this is an editorial move from youtubr: it seems much more likely that this is automated monetization machinery run amok. I mean, we're talking about the company that's drowning its users in chat applications/protocols. That said, the i agree that archive.org or Wikimedia might be good ways to publish. S…

You don't seem to have read the link. There were humans in the loop.

Re: Blender is testing PeerTube after YouTube blocks their videos worldwide

#292

Post by tcit »

0xcde4c3db wrote: post #227

Does PeerTube provide a way to have any server other than the originating instance act as a tracker/seed? The readme diagrams make it seem like the long-term video hosting is still effectively centralized, with only metadata being federated.

It is planned.

Re: Blender is testing PeerTube after YouTube blocks their videos worldwide

#293

Post by notroot »

bordercases wrote: post #290
codelord wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is terrifying about this? Why should Google pay for hosting and distributing your video online forever without making any money? How's that "evil"?

Monopoly of convenience and loyalty capture There's no good reason why, but that's why we try to regulate monopolies

There are a lot of good reasons why monopolies should be regulated.

Re: Blender is testing PeerTube after YouTube blocks their videos worldwide

#294

Post by Krasnol »

codelord wrote: post #281
Endy wrote: post #270

Am I the only one who thinks it would be better if Blender uploaded directly to archive.org or archive.is? As much as it's interesting on a technical level, the fact that PeerTube is by nature decentralized and self-hosted is going to reduce Blender's overall visibility (which is what I think Alphabet/Google wants). Whether Alphabet is still making any money off SketchUp, or whether one of the 3D companies is paying…

What is terrifying about this? Why should Google pay for hosting and distributing your video online forever without making any money? How's that "evil"?

You are absolutely right! Google has been suffering under all this user generated content dragging even more visitors to their already struggling hosting infrastructure for too long! It's time for relief! Let's move the burden of user generated content away and let others suffer!

Free Google!

Re: Blender is testing PeerTube after YouTube blocks their videos worldwide

#295

Post by twelvechairs »

Endy wrote: post #270

Am I the only one who thinks it would be better if Blender uploaded directly to archive.org or archive.is? As much as it's interesting on a technical level, the fact that PeerTube is by nature decentralized and self-hosted is going to reduce Blender's overall visibility (which is what I think Alphabet/Google wants). Whether Alphabet is still making any money off SketchUp, or whether one of the 3D companies is paying…

SketchUp is no longer Google/Alphabet owned. It was sold to Trimble (a GPS/Geospatial company)

Re: Blender is testing PeerTube after YouTube blocks their videos worldwide

#296

Post by notroot »

codelord wrote: post #281
Endy wrote: post #270

Am I the only one who thinks it would be better if Blender uploaded directly to archive.org or archive.is? As much as it's interesting on a technical level, the fact that PeerTube is by nature decentralized and self-hosted is going to reduce Blender's overall visibility (which is what I think Alphabet/Google wants). Whether Alphabet is still making any money off SketchUp, or whether one of the 3D companies is paying…

What is terrifying about this? Why should Google pay for hosting and distributing your video online forever without making any money? How's that "evil"?

'codelord:working on ml @google' haha. using accrued inertia/loyalty to bully/force `mit ocw` and `blender` to adopt more convenient terms for the company is, at minimum, a dick move.

but i get it, you got some stock and you gotta protect that bottom line.

Re: Blender is testing PeerTube after YouTube blocks their videos worldwide

#297

Post by bad_user »

codelord wrote: post #281
Endy wrote: post #270

Am I the only one who thinks it would be better if Blender uploaded directly to archive.org or archive.is? As much as it's interesting on a technical level, the fact that PeerTube is by nature decentralized and self-hosted is going to reduce Blender's overall visibility (which is what I think Alphabet/Google wants). Whether Alphabet is still making any money off SketchUp, or whether one of the 3D companies is paying…

What is terrifying about this? Why should Google pay for hosting and distributing your video online forever without making any money? How's that "evil"?

Because they allowed it until now and it's been years since.

Changing their policies now hurts non-profit organizations like the Blender Foundation and is in effect a bait and switch. Google is using at this point its monopoly to coerce their partners and users into accepting whatever the heck they want. Personally I don't understand them. This is clearly about a very popular channel that is bringing them eyeballs.

I also have no sympathy for their need to monetize — several years back we had a protest in my country against a gold mining company and the YouTube videos made by protesters where preceded by ads of the mining company, ads which were lying and that couldn't be reported for that.

Ads on YouTube are dangerous as they aren't just about products or services, but about social and political issues too and whomever has the bucks to pay wins more attention. As an author, having the ability to disable ads for certain videos is common sense.

---

Also, Google, I would have registered for YouTube Red to pay cash for an ad free experience, but you haven't made it available in my country yet and I've been waiting for a long time.

Re: Blender is testing PeerTube after YouTube blocks their videos worldwide

#298

Post by akerro »

codelord wrote: post #281
Endy wrote: post #270

Am I the only one who thinks it would be better if Blender uploaded directly to archive.org or archive.is? As much as it's interesting on a technical level, the fact that PeerTube is by nature decentralized and self-hosted is going to reduce Blender's overall visibility (which is what I think Alphabet/Google wants). Whether Alphabet is still making any money off SketchUp, or whether one of the 3D companies is paying…

What is terrifying about this? Why should Google pay for hosting and distributing your video online forever without making any money? How's that "evil"?

Hmmm... If they only didn't track us on every mouse move, every click, every video and every recommendation. That's an exchange, I'm a product for using their product.

Re: Blender is testing PeerTube after YouTube blocks their videos worldwide

#299

Post by etatoby »

From Google's point of view, the Blender Foundation are the bad guys. They host a very popular channel on their servers, using up a lot of bandwidth, storage, and resources, they don't pay a cent to the hosting provider, and on top of that, they actively try to prevent their content from paying up for itself. I don't see it as shocking that Google is forcing them to enable ads.

What I find surprising is that Google did not see this coming and thus A. never limited ad-free content to small channels in their ToS, and B. does not provide a paid hosting option.

Post reply on HN